Examination of witnesses (Questions 360 - 361)
TUESDAY 9 JUNE 1998
SIR JOHN
KERR, KCMG,
MR FRANCIS
RICHARDS, CMG,
CVO,
MR ROLAND
SMITH, CMG
and MR ROY
DIBBLE
Sir John Stanley
360. I would merely like to put the suggestion
to you, Sir John, that I hope you will not just look at it from
an FCO permanent investment policy, you may consider it as simply
a financial issue coming out of the standard financial transfer
arrangements between departments when emergency contingencies
arise. Just as we sanctioned a multi-million pound transfer when
the RAF was lending its Hercules to the Foreign Office to deal
with Ethiopian famine, equally it is open to the Department to
draw on, at no doubt an agreed financial cost, the necessary resources
to enable your ambassadors to have the availability for a month
or two, whatever it happens to be. I would like to have your assurance
that if such arrangements could be established within Whitehall
that does not require any permanent capital investment, you would
simply draw on resources which are already there and it would
make certain that we do not have positions in which ambassadors
or high commissioners are left in emergencies without secure communications.
(Sir John Kerr) The resources may be there, Sir
John, but they are not necessarily in my budget. As an ex-Defence
Minister, you will know well what kind of charges the Ministry
of Defence makes.
Chairman: Sir John,
we have kept you and your colleagues—
Sir John Stanley
361. One final piece of business. We have
managed to go through the whole of this session in my hearing—I
hope I am right—eventually with answers being given by Sir
John and his colleagues without taking refuge behind the Legg
Inquiry. I hope we can conclude by having your assurance, Sir
John, that the remaining four questions for further material which
were left unanswered after your earlier evidence of 14th May will
now be the subject of answers to this Committee?
(Sir John Kerr) No, Mr Chairman, I am afraid I
cannot give that assurance. We are in overlap area here.
Chairman: Sir John,
you will reflect on that. You will understand from this morning
that the Committee has been eminently reasonable and that by reflecting
further on those questions you can possibly prevent your appearance
yet again before the Committee. May I ask you to reflect further
on those answers and we shall then consider our position? We have
kept you in the field very long, I suspect the debate will continue,
you will have Sierra Leone engraved upon your heart.
Sir Peter Emery: Mr
Chairman, can I interfere for a moment? I understand Sir John
cannot be expected to deal with the four outstanding questions,
of which one is mine, overnight but we cannot expect this to be
much prolonged because this Committee must consider the aspect
of what Sir John has done and what action has to be taken. So
if it was still to be a negative reply, I think this Committee
wants to know pretty quickly because it would want in fact to
take further action.
Chairman: Sir John,
you will reflect on that and you will come back as soon as possible.
Thank you very much indeed.
|
